On Thursday, 14 March 2019 07:04:53 PDT Jason H wrote: > perhaps adding a QProcess::notRunning signal is in order? Or at least some > clarification in the docs?
Sorry, no. Just the name of the signal you proposed shows it's a bad idea. Signals are always named after verbs in the past tense, indicating something that happened. A process that wasn't running and still isn't running does not indicate something that happened. You're proposing a signal to show that nothing happened, which is not something we want for signals. At best, we that signal would be "failedToStart", but that's just the errorOccurred signal we already have. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel System Software Products _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
